Fantastic Piece written with great amount of research. Would love to share a couple of points: 1) India's definition of secularism is as clear as Delhi's skies while the stubble burns. 2) There is no common consensus amongst religious leaders itself with respect to what is essential for a religion and what is not. The best example can be the Hijab controversy in India Vs Iran. Albeit the controversy in India dealt with the inclusion of the garment in the uniform, in India it was hailed as essential while in the Iran and many other countries where the population demography through the lens of religion is largely Muslim and has had a lot of contribution to Islamic literature find themselves juxtaposed against what the Indian Islamic Scholarly Community had to say. Even for a common legislation to be made for the religion of Islam, the conflict of Shia's and Sunnis and their own ideas would emerge. 3) UCC is that onion which, if explored deeper and deeper leads to nothing as it does not even exist as of yet. The Indian state has a lot to sort out in the first place from a legal standpoint and a moral standpoint. It is only after that can the UCC be brought forth. A central issue being, caste in the case of an individual who has converted the religion. If an individual denounces the religion from which he perceives the origin of caste and converts into a religion where the identity of caste has been shunned and the said individual is not an individual upon whom the identity can be asserted, why or can he claim any benefits meted out to that caste? Another issue which should be sorted out by the Indian state is, why should Hindu temples pay tax in the first place? If places of worship have to be taxed, let all of them be taxed or tax none. The fervour of selectivity is appalling at its best. Until and unless the state answers these questions Among the plethora, the UCC should not be passed as why is it that a community should always claim moral high ground at the loss of their traditional policies at the behest of the upholding of the traditional policies of another religion? Kindly note that this is my opinion at a personal capacity and I am welcome to clarifications and criticisms.
Fantastic Piece written with great amount of research. Would love to share a couple of points: 1) India's definition of secularism is as clear as Delhi's skies while the stubble burns. 2) There is no common consensus amongst religious leaders itself with respect to what is essential for a religion and what is not. The best example can be the Hijab controversy in India Vs Iran. Albeit the controversy in India dealt with the inclusion of the garment in the uniform, in India it was hailed as essential while in the Iran and many other countries where the population demography through the lens of religion is largely Muslim and has had a lot of contribution to Islamic literature find themselves juxtaposed against what the Indian Islamic Scholarly Community had to say. Even for a common legislation to be made for the religion of Islam, the conflict of Shia's and Sunnis and their own ideas would emerge. 3) UCC is that onion which, if explored deeper and deeper leads to nothing as it does not even exist as of yet. The Indian state has a lot to sort out in the first place from a legal standpoint and a moral standpoint. It is only after that can the UCC be brought forth. A central issue being, caste in the case of an individual who has converted the religion. If an individual denounces the religion from which he perceives the origin of caste and converts into a religion where the identity of caste has been shunned and the said individual is not an individual upon whom the identity can be asserted, why or can he claim any benefits meted out to that caste? Another issue which should be sorted out by the Indian state is, why should Hindu temples pay tax in the first place? If places of worship have to be taxed, let all of them be taxed or tax none. The fervour of selectivity is appalling at its best. Until and unless the state answers these questions Among the plethora, the UCC should not be passed as why is it that a community should always claim moral high ground at the loss of their traditional policies at the behest of the upholding of the traditional policies of another religion? Kindly note that this is my opinion at a personal capacity and I am welcome to clarifications and criticisms.